Bridges - who benefits?

I recently came across two interesting stories on how new bridges are planning to change their respective city’s.  The Bridge of Knowledge in Rio de Janeiro is just one sign of the insatiable growth of the Brazilian economy (now 6^th largest in the world) and at $35 million will link the Federal University with the Red Line motorway.  Yet, this article in The Guardian focuses less on the economic boosterism and more on how the construction of the bridge required bribes be paid to pacify local drug gangs.  Furthermore, the new bridge and road has required noise barriers to be constructed, according to the article, in order to hide the surrounding slums from view – possibly with an eye to the influx of visitors for the 2014 World Cup and 2016 Olympics.  


In a similar story the Washington Post reports on how the Baluarte Bicentennial Bridge in Mexico could end up aiding rather than hiding the criminal drug gangs (see here).  The bridge is part of a wider $1.5 billion super highway which will connect the states of Durango and Sinaloa and provide a link between the Gulf of Mexico and the Pacific Ocean.  Yet, unfortunately the new infrastructure could be used as a convenient route for drug smuggling.  It seems bridges and roads can be a vital tool for economic development, but who benefits is a different question.

The Baluarte Bicentennial Bridge

Front Pages News - Planner Sacked!

I have quickly understood that the planning profession is more high profile in Vancouver compared to other cities I have lived and worked in.  But the sacking last week of Director of Planning Brent Toderian really emphasized the point.  The news that Mayor Gregor Robertson had sacked Toderian was just that – it was news.  Lead story on the CBC radio news.  Front page of the Vancouver Sun.  What would it take for the Director of Planning in London to make the front page of the Evening Standard?  More to the point, who is the Director of Planning in London?

Partly this situation stems from the differing governance structures, where in the UK the head of planning is less visible in articulating a vision for the city and it is normally the lowly ‘case officer’ who presents development schemes to Council.  In a discretionary system I would argue the UK planner has less influence on proactively setting policy compared to the US and Canada where land is actively zoned and rezoned. 

The other reason Toderian’s firing got such extended media coverage was the emphasis placed on city planning in Vancouver.  The city likes to take planning very serious, as shown by the premium placed on urban design reviews, substantial amenity contributions and the development of a ‘Vancouverism’ model.  Because the city lacks a longstanding urban form (especially compared to European cities), Vancouver has seen significant change over the last 25 years.  This has allowed the planning department to masterplan large tracts of brownfield land, including Coal Harbour and South East False Creek.  It should also be remembered that Toderian has followed in the footsteps of Larry Beasley who raised the profile of planning both locally and internationally through a sustained branding of what Vancouver urbanism entails.  This has meant that real estate and development are highly visible to locals on a day to day basis and, by association, the Director of Planning is hard to escape from.

Either this or it was just a slow news day.

The Need for Speed

One third of the growth previously forecast by HS2 Ltd to occur on the West Coast Main Line between 2008 and 2043 has been achieved in the last three years. (p.16)

The above quote is taken from the Updated appraisal of transport user benefits and wider economic benefits to support the planned High Speed rail line from London to Birmingham and then on to Manchester and Leeds (known as HS2).   It clearly shows how inaccurate economic forecasts are.  Even with the best economic minds at work, the Department of Transport got the forecast for HS2 passenger volumes so wrong in February 2011 that they have now come up with a new figure.  Whether the revised forecast is any closer to reality, nobody knows.  The worrying fact is that these forecasts are the basis for the Government's decision to commit £30 billion on what they deem a 'key and vital investment in Britain's future'. 



Taking the economic appraisal at face value, here are a few assumptions which caught my eye:

• People are expected to make more longer (over 100 mile) trips in the future.  Currently the average person makes 0.8 long trips per year and this is forecast to increase to 1.3 trips.  This doesn't appear much but it means the number of long trips will increase by 92% in a period of time when the UK population will only grow by 19%;
• 81% of trips between Scotland and England will be undertaken by High Speed rail by 2037.  Currently the figure is 54%; and
• Only a small percentage (8%) of trips on HS2 will be shifted from private car.  The majority (65%) of trips will be diverted from existing rail routes.  This suggests that if the aim of HS2 was to decrease car use, it will not make a significant impact.

Justine Greening MP (right) and a train

A major justification for HS2 is the potential to decrease travel times between major cities.  London to Birmingham will be cut by approximately 20 minutes, and the London to Manchester route will drop from the current 2 hours to approximately 1 hour 20 minutes.  But are these time savings worth the considerable investment?  


The journey time savings are forecast to be worth a saving of £24.5 billion.  Yet for me there is not enough evidence in the appraisal to justify the economic value of cost savings.  Business people can work on trains so what will a saving of 20 minutes do for the economy?  In addition, the time savings will be strongly dependent on where the HS2 stations are located.  There is no net benefit if stations are not easily accessible to other city locations by local transport.  What is the point if you save one hour on the HS2 train to Manchester but then get stuck on a bus or tram whilst traveling through the city.  For me, this is the key point.  I support the opinion of Sir Simon Jenkins (see here) who argues that the money could have been better spent on providing trams or light rail for all the major cities in the UK.  I support the principle of high speed rail, but in a country such as the UK it doesn't seem appropriate and instead we should focus on improving the public transport within cities which can generate much better economic, health, social and environmental benefits for a greater share of the population. 

Guernsey Development Plan Review - Places, Spaces & People

I like to keep an eye on land use and transport planning back in my home island, so it was good to see the States of Guernsey committing to some long term policy development through the review of the two island Development Plans - the Rural Area Plan and the Urban Area Plan.  Consultation is currently ongoing on a series of Topic Papers which cover a range of issues and can be found here.  The deadline for responses is 16 March 2012.  


I have read through one of the overarching Topic Papers ('A Sustainable Approach') and have put together a few thoughts on the issues it raises below.  Not surprisingly I have focused on transport, which I think is the most important issue facing the island over the next 10 and 20 years.

'Spacing Vancouver' - Book Review of Making Healthy Places

You can read my review of the book Making Healthy Places here.  The book introduces some important connections between the disciplines of urban planning and public health.